Tribunal grants appellant concessional duty rate under Notification No. 11/97-Cus

The Tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the order that denied the appellant the benefit of the concessional rate of duty under Notification No.11/97-Cus. It held that the actual user condition cannot be imposed retrospectively on imports made before the circular's issuance, citing judicial pronouncements and precedents. The Tribunal emphasized that goods for use in the leather industry can be covered under the notification without imposing actual user conditions, ultimately granting the appellant the benefit of the notification.

---

---

Issues:
- Benefit of exemption Notification No.11/97-Cus.
- Conditions for availing concessional rate of duty under the notification.
- Interpretation of CBEC circular No. 74/98-Cus.
- Applicability of actual user condition on imported goods.
- Judicial pronouncements on the issue.
- Decision on the appeal.

Analysis:
The appeal revolves around the benefit of exemption Notification No.11/97-Cus claimed by the appellant for importing "insole sheets for leather footwear." The appellant's bill of entry was provisionally assessed pending a Test Report, which confirmed the sheets' use as insole material in shoe making. The final assessment extended the benefit of the notification and dropped the less charge demand. However, the first appellate authority held that the appellant failed to fulfill the conditions prescribed in the notification, thus denying the benefit.

The Tribunal examined the submissions and the notification's conditions, particularly serial No.94, which specifies goods for use in the leather industry with a concessional rate of duty. The products imported by the appellant were listed in list 3(A) without additional conditions. Referring to CBEC circular No. 74/98-Cus., the Tribunal emphasized that goods for use in the leather industry could be covered under the notification without imposing actual user conditions.

Citing judicial pronouncements and precedents, the Tribunal highlighted that the actual user condition cannot be imposed retrospectively on imports made before the circular's issuance. Relying on the Tribunal's previous decisions, the Tribunal concluded that the appellant cannot be denied the concessional rate of duty benefit based on the actual user condition.

Therefore, the Tribunal allowed the appeal and set aside the impugned order, emphasizing that the actual user condition cannot be applied to imports made before the circular's issuance, thereby granting the appellant the benefit of the concessional rate of duty under Notification No.11/97-Cus.

---